Discussion in 'Current Affairs & Debate' started by Sebastian Flyte, Apr 21, 2006.
History is written by David Starkey and the Greek posters on esctoday.com only.
I think it's inconceivable that they wouldn't have lost in 1997. If by some miracle of Tony Blair being arrested for peadophilia on the eve of the election, they had won, they would have limped on still further weakened. It was definitely time to go.
You can read their 1997 election manifesto here: http://www.psr.keele.ac.uk/area/uk/man/con97.htm
Scroll to the end for the 'summing up'
EDIT: Wrong quote, this is in answer to the point about the Tories staying in power.
thats not what I was getting at though, The country would be in a far worse state now had the tories remained in power.
Not in my opinion.
Do you think they would have introduced Civil partnerships or removed section 28?
Britain does not exist in a vacuum. Society and the world moves on. No doubt the pace of social change in terms of legislation would have been slower, but that's not to say it wouldn't have happened.
Good grief.....now I've never voted Labour but the Tories really did deserve to be kicked out in 1997. The party was in a mess and the country needed someone different in power....
Any party that stays in over a certain amount of years needs kicking out due to complacency really.....
I agree. That's what I've been saying.
But I don't think there was any NEED to remove section 28.
Oh right...i misread.
You sir, are a liar and an idiot.
so where would we be do you think? Wjat were they doing leading up to 1997 that gave you ANY inkling that things would get better? I see nothing
I RESENT that. :Oi:
Do you think they would have removed section 28 by now? I sincerely doubt they would have introduced Civil Partnerships.
I RESENT YOU.
Personally, I don't believe you're gay. But if you are, you are one screwed up mother-fucka, as texans might say.
I am adding you to my IGNORE list. :music:
Better in what way? I think this hypothetical argument isn't going anywhere really. Governments grow stale and get booted out, and the Tories in 1997 were extremely stale and deserved to go. Infact, I wish they had gone in 1992, but with less of a landslide -I think it would have improved the political situation alot, and been better for democracy.
However, I do maintain that New Labour has simply been a BAD Government. Barren of genuine ideas and conviction beyond a highly corrosive dogma of political correctness, extremely lacking in administrative capability, shameless in gaining and hanging on to power and disdainful of the democratic process and the constitution, obsessed with spin and highly damaging publicity seeking initiatives/targets, with a piss-weak attitude towards Europe in the cause of 'not being isolated', and a similarly supine attitude to George Bush's foreign policy. Why is Tony Blair so desperate to stay in and try and forge SOMETHING of a legacy? Because his party started with the best of ALL circumstances, both economically and in terms of public goodwill, and proceeded to do FUCK ALL with it.
well you;ve derided all the improvements that have been made already in this thread that or ignored them. For me the fact of the matter is that while Blair is far from perfect, I honestly believe he does things for the best intentions.
I'll ask another question then, do you honestly think the tory party as they CURRENTLY stand would do a better job? I struggle to believe you if you say yes as frankly they haven't held on to a single policy for more than about a WEEK
You deride the Dave the Chameleon advert, but it really is saying what most people I talk to think about Cameron's policies.
I havent kept up with Tory policy recently. I'm not overly keen on David Cameron, though I do see his apeal. But do I think the Tories at the 2004 election would have been better? Why hell yes. Their policies on vocational education and the skills shortage were highly necessary and sensible, as were their NHS plans, with cleanliness a particular issue and bringing back Matrons. And I think a bigger crack down on anti-social behaviour, which was promised, was also a must. I whole-heartedly supported them in that election, and I wish they'd done better.
And as far as the current local elections go, just have a look at the broadcasts. The Conservative ones are at least focussing on something positive that has actually been acheived. The Labour ones are busy point-scoring.
and the tories have never been known to indulge in negative campaigning have they? Don;t get me wrong I hate it and its a shame labour have resorted to it but tyhe tories have before and will again, its the nature of politics.
The plans for the health service were laughable and the tories have changed policy on this how many times since then? 3? 4? I can't keep up.
The bringing back matrons idea was a GIMMICK, look at us harking back to the good old days, we'll put someone in charge and call them matron, the oldes will LOVE it. Cleanliness is an issue which woul have been and has been dealt with. MRSA is a relatively new phenomenom, any government would have struggled to act on it quickly as standards must be so much higher now than they had to be in history.
Vocational education? i forget what the policy was, but working in education i know that the tories have done little in the past to make me think they are the party to move the education system forward. Labour have fucked it up but I know we're better funded now than we would have been.
How would thay have dealt with antisocial behaviour more than labour have? lock em up? more prisons needed? I seem to recall Cameron talking about being more LIBERAL in the judicial system a few weeks back, how would that help exactly?
It was only last year actually. But that was probably just a typo.
Your reading of their NHS policy is facile and superficial. Actually, bringing back matrons with the power to close dirty wards was far from a gimmick, as Labour's targets had made it impossible for hospitals to close wards, dirty or otherwise, directly contributing to the spread of mrsa and other hospital acquired infections. The NHS is currently suffering under layer upon layer of failed initiatives and arbitrary targets which distort clinical priorities, hence the huge chunks of public money being poured into it are not enough to prevent current job cuts in frontline staff.
Labour have royally fucked the education system over, again with a totally arbitrary target of ensuring that 50% of students go to university. This has resulted in stupid degrees like management that could be accomplished in a year in college becoming the norm, and the general culture is that university is for everyone unless there is something wrong with you. This is a repulsively elitist point of view, as well as being damaging to the country as a whole in terms of vital skills. Labours specialist schools policy is also an abysmal and pointless failure which has led (for example) my old school pissing money up the wall on electronic white-boards when they weren't allowed to buy books with it.
As for law and order -yes lock them the fuck up. I'm all for tackling the root causes, but a government's first responsibility is to the saftey of its citizens, and if people are a danger on the streets, they should be taken off there, whether or not they had a shit home life. I don't know what David Cameron's current stance is, but I highly doubt that any Conservative Government would let people out after 6 years when they were given a life sentence, or let people out on probation to rape and kill again.
No, I'm not very good at remembering dates.
Well aren't you a caring individual.
I suppose you'll be happy to pay for the higher taxes in order to build new prisons to keep all these people?
Yes, I am a caring individual actually, thanks for asking. And yes, I would approve of extra money being found to build new prisons, by additional taxation if necessary. Would you continue with the status quo, with judges discouraged from handing down custodial sentences because 'we're a bit full at the moment'?
In the longer term, I would like to see prisons funded by self funding enterprise, but I recognise that a mountain of legal and practical obstacles would have to be overcome before this could be put into operation.
Community sentences, in the majority of offences, are the best way to deal with things. Of course, rapists and murders should be locked up... but speed driving? Using recreational drugs? Nope. Just make them give something back to society and avoid them from the jails which promote criminality.
And are you suggesting we PRIVATISE prisons? my GOD
why stop there - let's privatise the police too.
Eh? I was not advocating custodial sentences for minor crimes. The punishment should of course fit the crime, which is why it is unnacceptable for the sentence handed down to be dictated by the scarcity of prison places, or by any other consideration except seriousness of the crime committed.
As for privatisation, where the hell did I mention that? Self funding enterprise means prisoners working for their keep, in whatever capacity. It would be a way of literally 'paying their debt' to society, whilst in an ideal world it would also provide them with other work opportunities once out of prison. Like I said, there are huge obstacles to overcome before this could ever become a reality. But the principle is sound.
I disagree, it was an opportunity for the tories to hark back to the 'golden days'. A lot IS being done to tackle MRSA and as I've said, whichever government had faced its rise would inevitably struggle to contain it, because its erdication requires far higher standards of cleanliness than have ever been demanded before. The tories WERE also faffing about wth the idea of the health 'passports' so you can book yourself in to thew hospital of your choice... and the state will pay half if you choose to go private. So not only are our taxes paying for the NHS, but for private healthcare aswell... makes sense. the purpose of this? Well its not happening now is it anyway, they don't SUPPORT that policy anymore, despite Cameron being quite the advocate in the none so distant past Now after getting a HUGE amount of criticism he believes in an NHS free at the point of need and not to have to have medical insurance.
Problem is, he comes across as VERY unprincipled, and by virtue of this so do the party he leads. Again I agree that Blair has made mistakes but I admire the fact that he WILL stick to his princples whatever fl;ak is thrown at him, it shows resolve and shows that he IS doing what he thinks is right, noyt just flagrantly cahsing votes.
Its not perfect, the NHS is haemorrhaging money and simething needs to be done, I have family that work in the system so I know the situation only too well. But I also know that they've worked in the NHS through a tory administration and know that on balance they are FAR better off in the current climate. The current job losses are an abomination and need to be dealt with, but on the other side of the coin, advances have been made in the NHS in terms of waiting lists dropping, the tories have consistently changed there stance on the NHS and give no evidewnce they have a cogent plan to improve it from its current position, which is a damn sight better than they left it in in 1997
I don't agree with the idea of so many people going to university simply because its needed as a discrimnator, if everyone has a degree the degree becomes meaningless. In terms of funding, my school has a slight dip in budget this year due to falling numbers something thats inevitable as families have less children. But actually, in the 6 years I've been teaching I've seen large budgetary rises. we've had budgets solely for ICT too, but these have been over and above what we would othewise have had. The fact is, the schools need to have up to date ICT facilities as this is the world that the crrent students will be living and working in. the use of electronic whiteboards and the like can actually be of great assistance in teaching them
The specialist school idea? well no I'm not a fan, but again theres an increase to the budget, albeit one we have to work for and justify, its hard work but if it brings more money into the school of course they'll be encouraged to do it. The education system is having to account for itself more and more much like in the commercial sector and to be honest its inevitable that this would be the case. and the money DOES have to spent in specific areas related to the specialism, but this does mean that area needs less capitation from the overall school budget which means this can be spead through the other areas of the school.
but thats my POINT the new touchy feely tories ARE showing a much more liberal stance. This sint about what YOU think its about what the tories ae doing, the party you support and say would actually be an improvement on the curent position
Sorry.. i was drunk and tired
A few points.
Tony Blair once advocated full withdrawal from the E.U, or the E.E.C as it once was. And now in power he has signed several treaties forging closer integration, advocated the new E.U constitution, and even handed over a portion of our hard fought rebate, for shit all in return. I think you'll find this a far more fundamental shift in beliefs than whether or not people should get half their treatment paid for if they go private. But yet he's meant to be more principled? Go and tell someone on the street that Tony Blair does what he thinks is right and doesn't chase votes, they'll laugh their arses off, and rightly so. This is the man who has ushered in the era of the Spin Doctors, who 'bury bad news', and under whom politics and politicians have sunk to an all time low in public esteem.
As for the NHS, I have no idea how the Tories plan to improve things, but from what I hear, doing NOTHING and just LEAVING IT THE FUCK ALONE for a few years might be a good start, instead of heaping shallow publicity seeking targets and shake-ups one on top of another. Right from the very start, Labour's waiting list targets distorted clinical priorities, meaning if you had a mole to get knocked off, you went to the top of the queue, because your operation was quick and easy, and fuck the old ladies who needed another hip. That is disgusting and wrong, and it was just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the lengths that this repulsive Government would meddle in the NHS to make it look as though they were acheiving something.
As for law and order, I pray to God that the Tories don't lose their edge on this. If there was ever a time for a bunch of hangers and floggers to get into power, it's now, with lawless bestial chavs roaming the streets terrorising all and sundry. That's why its a shame Michael Howard didn't get in. I feel if he had, I would already live in a safer country.
They don't contribute to the economy.
Nor do LAYABOUT students.
But students generally go on to contribute to the economy.
The oldies don't normally start working after their hip gets replaced.
Well they SHOULD. Give them a PAPER ROUND.
I'm too busy giving supervisions.
As this became a thread on Labours acheivements or lack of, I would like to add this editorial comment from the Daily Telegraph. And YES it is thoroughly biased before anyone states the obvious. But it does sum up my view on the situation.
"Fooling none of the people, all of the time
Yet again, Tony Blair has made an error of taste by seeking to trivialise grave failings by his colleagues. "Nine days' headlines," he told a union conference yesterday, "should not obscure nine years of achievements." Today's headline - about the link between undeported dangerous criminals and the murder of Pc Sharon Beshenivsky - shows why he cannot play down these mistakes.
Yesterday was, indeed, the ninth anniversary of his entry into Downing Street, immediately after a campaign in which he had pledged his administration would be "whiter than white" after years of "Tory sleaze". Enter Prescott, stage left: sic transit gloria mundi.
These nine years of achievement would be hard for even the shopworkers' delegates whom Mr Blair was addressing to discern. The burden of taxation has increased on everybody since then. The public services for which this is paying have not markedly improved. Our schools continue to turn out school-leavers who are functionally innumerate and illiterate after 11 years of full-time education.
Young people pass examinations at school - and even at some universities - only because the pass mark has been lowered to insulting levels. The NHS is laying off doctors and nurses, and hospitals are threatened with closure. Britain is in the grip of a crime wave. The prisons are overflowing. There are scant controls on immigration. The last two points are linked in the 1,000 or so serious criminals at large in this country who should be facing deportation.
Devolution has broken up the United Kingdom, put new burdens on taxpayers, undermined the national identity and done nothing to improve government. Our foreign policy is incoherent and impotent. Our armed forces are underfunded and overstretched, and put in lethal danger in a war from which there is still no obvious exit.
As well as more than 100 servicemen and women, at least one distinguished public servant - Dr David Kelly - has died as a result of the Government's shabby handling of this issue. Our farming industry is near to collapse, not least because the system of paying subsidies to our farmers is a shambles. Many months of parliamentary time were wasted abolishing foxhunting, which continues anyway. The House of Lords has suffered an incomplete reform, losing many of its best people, and is in the process of being turned into a rubber-stamp for the fiats of the executive.
A police investigation is under way to establish whether places in the Upper House have in effect been sold to willing customers to benefit Labour Party funds. Attempts to reform local government have expensively failed. Several cabinet ministers have already departed because of sexual or financial improprieties: more seem certain to follow.
Nine years of achievement? Unfair headlines? We think not, Prime Minister."
Urgh, I stop reading the word Telegraph. Not worth wasting my time.
Nor was posting to say you weren't going to read it.